Ralston v. Ryan
| Decision Date | 08 October 1940 |
| Docket Number | No. 27406.,27406. |
| Citation | 217 Ind. 482,29 N.E.2d 202 |
| Parties | RALSTON et al. v. RYAN. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Action for a declaratory judgment by John C. Ryan against Glenn B. Ralston, etc., and others. From a judgment for the plaintiff, defendants appeal.
Reversed with directions.Appeal from Superior Court, Marion County; Herbert Spencer, judge.
Linder & Seet, of Indianapolis, for appellants.
No appellee's brief filed.
The appellee assumed office as surveyor of Marion County on January 1, 1939. Section 4 of chapter 21, Acts of 1933, fixes his salary at $2,400 per year, and section 10 of said act further provides: ‘That if the surveyor is a qualified licensed engineer, the salary of the surveyor shall be one and one-half (1 1/2) times the amount prescribed in this act.’ Secs. 49-1004 and 49-1010, Burns' 1933, Secs. 7534 and 7540, Baldwin's 1934. The appellee is not a licensed professional engineer under the laws of Indiana, but subsequent to assuming office, to-wit: on February 7, 1939, he was licensed to practice professional engineering by the state of Georgia. He thereafter brought this suit under the Declaratory Judgments Act (Sec. 3-1102, Burns' 1933, Sec. 439, Baldwin's 1934), asking for a decree to the effect that he is entitled to a salary of $3,600 per year, by virtue of the provision of the statute quoted above. The trial court made a general finding in favor of the appellee, and adjudged that he was a qualified licensed engineer, and by reason thereof entitled to a salary of $300 per month as such county surveyor. The county auditor, board of commissioners, and county council have joined in appealing to this court, assigning that the finding is not sustained by sufficient evidence and that it is contrary to law. The appellee has not seen fit to file a brief in support of the judgment rendered in his favor. We would be justified in treating the appellee's failure to file a brief as a confession of error, but in view of the public interest involved, we have concluded to consider the case on its merits.
The purpose of legislation requiring occupational or professional licenses is to subserve the public good and prevent such occupations or professions from being conducted in a manner injurious to the public welfare. 37 C.J., Licenses, § 5, p. 168. The state of Indiana, by appropriate legislation, has provided for the licensing of professional engineers and has established an administrative board for that purpose. Acts of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Silverthorne v. King
...623, at 625. Due to the nature of the errors of the trial court herein, this case will be decided on its merits. Ralston v. Ryan (1940), 217 Ind. 482, 29 N.E.2d 202. Before considering the appellants' argument concerning the trial court's submission of its bench notes as a part of the recor......
-
Pridgeon v. State
...to consideration in construing the same words in another statute. State v. Turner (1991), Ind., 567 N.E.2d 783; Ralston v. Ryan (1940), 217 Ind. 482, 29 N.E.2d 202. In construing the marijuana statute with the above definitions, the legislature's decision to enhance the offense of manufactu......
-
Indiana Dept. of State Revenue v. Hardware Wholesalers, Inc.
...an exemption available to those whose tax liability is calculated with reference to intangibles not so exempted. Cf. Ralston v. Ryan (1940), 217 Ind. 482, 29 N.E.2d 202 (finding no evidence that term "qualified licensed engineer" used differently in two distinct acts.) Moreover, if the legi......
- Cullins v. State, 27415.